Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt :)

[districtluke`]

Hi there, long time reader, first time poster!

As you have probably guessed by the title its another Lowell trying there luck thread :rolleyes:

I have read a million posts on here until my eyes went square but i'm getting myself all confused so hopefully you guys can help me based on my own situation, here goes..........

Back in 2008 I started a mobile phone contract with 3 mobile on 19/01/2008 everything was going swell until they decommissioned a mast near my house causing me to loose signal at home, after many calls about breach of contract the only solution I had was to just stop paying the bill, the last payment and contact I had with them was on 13/08/2009.

Fast forward a few years and I receive a letter from Lowell portfolio on 16/09/2015 stating that they had bought the account from 3 and used a credit reference agency to find me. this letter was ignored.

Next I get a letter from '3' ( Lowell pretending to be 3 using there logo etc ) on 5/10/2015 asking me to pay or they will sell the debt on ( odd as I thought had they had already sold it :rolleyes: ). This letter was also ignored.

So the next letter is a combined one that includes a letter from '3' saying that as I ignored the previous letter they have now sold the debt to Lowell and that they had included a summary from Lowell for my records. The enclosed letter from Lowell says that they purchased the debt on 16/12/2011 ( seriously?? you think someone would check consistency! ) and that I need to pay it or they will have no option but to proceed further. They also included a summary of my payments to 3 over the last 6 months before they closed the account. which clearly shows the last payment ( and last contact ) was made on 13/08/2009, it then shows that they invoiced on the 20/08/2009 and 20/09/2009 with no payment received and then the account was closed.

That is the point at which I decided that I need to deal with the situation, so I decided to ring them and arrange a payment plan, HOWEVER before that I decided to google the company thus leading me here. I read loads of stories similar to mine and decided that the account was likely statue barred so I sent the standard " I don't acknowledge the debt and that I see it as being statue barred and unless they can prove it isn't, to leave me alone " I also joined Experian at this time to see that my already fragile credit score ( I'd worked hard to get it to good after a few stupid mistakes when I was younger ) had taken a hit and fallen to poor/fair. It shows the default date as 14/02/2010 and that Lowell had updated on 25/03/2012.

I then received a response on 12/11/2015 stating that " your account is not statute barred as suggested in your letter " and that " this is because your debt did not become fully due and payable until three mobile issued a default notice - which you did not comply with. " it then goes on to state that the default date was 14/02/2010 and they consider it enforcable for 6 years after that date.

They have place the account on hold for 30 days to allow time for me to respond. Sooooo I searched through here again and i'm struggling to figure out the best way to respond to them other than I was going to use the 30 day period to my advantage figuring that as an absolute worst case scenario I can probably play letter ping pong for a couple of months until it becomes statue barred under there own terms anyway.

I'll summarize the situation as I appreciate I have written what appears to be a small novel.

Last payment / acknowledgment - 13/08/2009
Default date on Experian - 14/02/2010

Date I think debt became statue barred - 20/09/2015 ( guessing that the cause of action is the missed payment )
Date they think it becomes statue barred - 14/02/2016

So who's right? And what would be the best way to respond? I appreciate your time and knowledge in advance :wink1:

[districtluke`]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

Sorry to hassle guys but can anyone help?

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

Morning, reading xx

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

Yes, little bit of a novel.

Cause of Action would be the date they become entitled to claim the full amount from you. This would be when they were entitled to issue a default notice, not when they actually did. So the terms of the account would be needed but it is usually 1/2/3 missed payments. So it is tight but I reckon you'd be able to argue it successfully.

So I'd reply to them reasserting the account is statute barred, and became so on the date of your first missed payment as under the terms of the account they would have been entitled to request full payment at that point, it is of no affect whether they chose to or not, and that is the date of the cause of action. I'd say if they dispute this is the case could they kindly send to you copies of the original contract and terms on which they rely. Also add that you're sure they realise that a copy of the agreement and terms would be necessary if they intend to take the case to court and you'd obviously rather sort things out before that became necessary. As things stand you deny any debt is owed to them.

If they do go to court action you will be wanting to argue the dispute over the service originally as well, so it might be worth sending a subject access request under the data protection act to 3 for records of your calls and complaints about the phone mast being removed.

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

A mobile phone account being a service contract not a regulated credit agreement a default notice is not relevant.

The relevant 6 year period started when 3 mobile sent you a Demand for Immediate Payment in Full, and or a Final Demand for Payment In Full.

Theses will have been sent sometime prior to the default be recorded/reported to credit reference agencies.

This is a classic Lowlife attempt to bend the rules to suit itself.

As [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] has said reiterate your belief the debt is statute barred.


nem

[districtluke`]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

Brilliant thanks guys! You are a friendly bunch

I thought this this was the case, are there any sort of template letters I should use or just send them a letter saying that I believe they are wrong and that the default date is irrelevant as the limitation act runs from cause of action not default and that if they use intend to proceed any further they will need to provide some credible evidence that the debt isn't statue barred?

Many thanks again guys

[beaconsman]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

Hi, sorry I do scan the posts quite often.

Your point districtluke is indeed one that we have been arguing about for a long time, that in order for a debt to be chased, they DCA should have the documentation all in order PRIOR to chasing/harassing us.

I am not letting mine go even though lowlifes have closed my account..(see separate thread as its rather long!).

Just remember, do not speak to them via telephone. You can write a clear and concise letter far better than speaking to these fools.

Argue, barrage, harass them. Don't give up as sounds as if your case is more or less over being statute barred.

Good luck, Beacons.

[districtluke`]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

Hi guys, just a little update, I have sent the following letter back to Lowell, any comments are greatly welcomed




I do not acknowledge any debt to you or any other company or organisation that you claim to be representing.


Dear Sir/Madam


Lowell Reference Number: **********


Thank you for your correspondence dated 12/11/15, I would like to refer you again to the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5;


“An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from that date on which the cause of action accrued.”


The Consumer Credit Sourcebook produced by the financial conduct authority also states the following rules;


"...a firm must not attempt to recover a statute barred debt in England, Wales or Northern Ireland if the lender or owner has not been in contact with the customer during the limitation period." 7.15.4


"A firm must not continue to demand payment from a customer after the customer has stated that he will not be paying the debt because it is statute barred." 7.15.8


In your correspondence dated 12/11/15 you state that the Limitation Act does not apply because you consider the default date to be 14/02/10, which in your opinion, was when a default notice was issued by the original creditor making the full balance due.


As you will be aware the default date recorded with the credit reference agency, firstly bares no relationship as to when a default notice was issued and secondly cannot be used to determine when the cause of action starts. This is because the default date registered is a procedural matter and can be entered at any point in time by the controller of the data.


Unfortunately your organisation has failed to provide any credible evidence that the Limitation Act 1980 does not apply to this debt and therefore my position still stands.


The last payment or acknowledgement of this debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written acknowledgement from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.


I await your written confirmation that no further contact will be made concerning the above account and confirmation that this matter is now closed.


I look forward to hearing from you.


Yours faithfully






Mr L Anderson

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell Portfolio chasing old debt

That's fine says it all.
It's no use Lowell claiming that a default notice was issued and not complied with on
an unregulated service contract, the Final Demand For Immediate Payment in full would
imo be the date the relevant 6 year period started.

nem